Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker

Abstract

New data and new methods have provided many new insights into rural households in the past 50 years. We analyze what we have learned from household models since Boserup and Becker, using this to frame more recent findings about household behavior from three types of studies: observational studies, experimental games, and impact evaluations. More sex‐disaggregated data, as well as data that are collected at smaller units, such as agricultural plots, have allowed us to better understand agricultural productivity, risk sharing, and spousal cooperation. However, the focus on bargaining within households has often led us to ignore the cooperation that occurs within households. Many resources are owned and managed jointly by household members and many decisions are made jointly, although not all parties necessarily have equal voice in these decisions. Research demonstrating that households often do not reach efficient outcomes suggests that we still have much to learn about rural household behavior. Understanding both individual roles within households and the levels of cooperation, including joint decision making and ownership of resources, is essential to analysis of households, especially in rural areas where households engage in both production and consumption.

Onto the Farm, into the Home: How Intrahousehold Gender Dynamics Shape Land Restoration in Eastern Kenya

“…Our study challenges this notion and illustrates that, at least in eastern Kenya, decisions over the uptake of restorative farming practices are often initiated by women and usually involve some form of consultation between husband and wife. These findings further contribute to growing evidence that households in SSA often employ different decision-making dynamics with varying degrees of consultation, and that the household head is not always the sole decision-maker (Doss and Meinzen-Dick 2015, Meijer et al 2015, Doss and Quisumbing 2020.…”

“…In households with multiple decision-makers, changes made to farming activities and practices (innovations), are often negotiated between multiple members, each with differing preferences, priorities and bargaining power (Theis et al 2018, Shibata et al 2020. Even when men and women within the same household manage separate plots of land, decisions over the allocation of household labor and resources may be negotiated at the household level Meinzen-Dick 2015, Doss andQuisumbing 2020). Restoration initiatives that target individual farmers without considering their whole household and all of those involved in decisions over the use of an innovation (uptake decisions) may be less effective than those that do.…”

Women’s Changing Opportunities and Aspirations Amid Male Outmigration: Insights from Makueni County, Kenya

“…Our research also highlights the need to consider how individual livelihood strategies and aspirations interrelate and are mediated at the household level. While individuals within the same household may differ in their preferences and priorities, household members often own and manage resources collectively and make decisions together to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes (Doss and Meinzen-Dick 2015;Doss and Quisumbing 2020). In our study, men's and women's diverging and converging aspirations with age likely reflect gender-and age-dependent divisions of labour and familial responsibilities, and even a negotiated household strategy.…”

Bargaining power, decision making, and biofortification: The role of gender in adoption of orange sweet potato in Uganda

“…While substantial evidence supports a non-unitary model of the household, bargaining models have focused on individually consumed goods (or leisure) rather than joint production or consumption of the public good ( Doss and Quisumbing, 2020 ). Neglecting joint decision making overlooks the fact that globally, both sole and joint management and production by men and women take place on family farms.…”